Yuck

(via Scalzi)

I’d never even heard of this before, and thankfully it’s not around any more.

But just the concept of Raspberry-flavoured Coke makes me shudder…


Interest

Isn’t it a pity that we can’t have a flexible sentencing thing for people like this loan-shark who charged an 8,000,000% interest.

That way, his eight-month sentence could be added to in the same way that his loans were added to – just keep on adding time to it until he was there for life, as a living example of what that kind of interest does to people…


UKIP Voters Can’t Unfold Paper

You just couldn’t make it up…

According to this post, a number of people wanting to vote for UKIP haven’t been able to because they haven’t fully unfolded their ballot papers.

So ridiculous it’s unreal.


Crop Circles

Ah, it must be summer – we’re starting to get the stories about crop circles again.

In fairness though, I love this crop circle in a jellyfish shape – that shows some real creativity.


Shallow Buyers

Recently, I’ve been doing a fair amount of working from home, which also means I get to see some daytime TV – particularly the BBC morning stuff, as I’m still nowhere near chavvy enough to want to watch Jeremy Sodding Shitbag Kyle (to give him his full name) which seems to still have an unhealthy preoccupation with property.

One of these programmes, “The Unsellables” focusses on (as you may have already guessed) properties that aren’t selling. None of what they do is overly surprising – clean/tidy up, get rid of clutter, tart the place up, blah blah blah. And I understand all those things – up to a point.

But the points they make in this programme (and I’m sure in many others) are that people won’t buy a place if they don’t like the wall colour, or clutter, or – god help us – the furniture. Now I’ve repeated been accused over the years of being too harsh on people etc., but are people really that dumb/unimaginative that they can’t picture their own stuff in a house, or see that it won’t take much to change a place from scruff-tip to decent place?

I don’t know – maybe it’s to the advantage of others. I know that when we looked at the house we’re now in, it hadn’t been popular because it was so seventies, and there were a number of things that really needed doing to it. And maybe it was also because we were prepared to do that work, even though we knew it’d take time. (Admittedly, we didn’t expect it to take the 2+ years it’s taken, but there we go) But that work has left us with a place we actually like, and that has added significant value to the place – plus (I hope) making it far more sellable as and when we do decide to move on. Not that we’re planning to, you understand – but it’s still something to think about.

So for us it was worth looking past the seventies tat, the horrific ornaments, the vile carpets, the monolithic fireplace and the awkward bits of layout – and I suspect that now if we were to look at buying this place in the state it’s now in, we’d be looking at spending a significant amount more than we’ve actually put in to the place.

All of which brings me back to wondering what the hell these buyers on “The Unsellables” et al are really thinking (or not, as the case may be) when they see these properties and not liking them. After all, if the sellers are so desperate to sell, why not put in an offer that’s well under the asking price?  Do some work – hell, even just some basic painting, cleaning, and moving stuff about, and the place would be back up to scratch for selling at the full price.

I must be missing something on this, but I really don’t know what…


More Research Required

I’ve just received one of the funnier spam emails of late…

I am Todd Williams, I am a staff of Natwest Bank Plc,U.K.i have a veryUrgent Business proposal of (£18,500,000.00 Million Pounds)for you to handle more details of this transaction,Please reply: im-a-fuckwit-spammer@emailaddress.info Kind Regards, Todd Williams(Mr.)ACCOUNTS OFFICER

That’s it in it’s entirety – and the only change I’ve made to it is the email address. Other than that, it’s exactly how it was received – piss-poor punctuation, grammar etc. all intact.

But the best bit of it (in my opinion) is the idea that in the current economic climate, some muppet in Nat West bank would have £18.5million to play with at all.

And seriously, what kind of fucking moron would you have to be to respond to a spam like that?


The Motorbike “Swerve Test”

One of the stories in the news yesterday was about the new motorbike driving test, and in particular the “Swerve test”. According to some instructors/examiners, this new module is dangerous – particularly in the wet.

During the test, learners have to reach 50km/h (31.2mph), then perform a swerve, on special test centre tracks.

But some instructors say that if riders brake and swerve at the same time they are likely to come off, particularly in the wet.

Now while I agree (to some degree) with the comment from the story “A motorcyclist’s competency can be best judged in the dry. Wet conditions introduce a chance element that should not be part of the test”, I also can’t help but feel that “real world” conditions are the best thing when it comes to taking a test – be it motorbike or car driving tests. I know I had driving lessons in some bloody horrible conditions (although admittedly not tests) including hail, driving snow, and plenty of night-time driving.

And if a rider can’t do this swerve at 30mph – and it’s a basic safety manoeuvre for getting out the way of incidents – then they damn well shouldn’t pass their tests. If they fall off and/or damage themselves as a result of this, surely that’s a learning experience in itself?

Even if that lesson is either a) “Don’t fall off the fucking bike” or just b) “Learn to ride properly, and deal with ‘real world’ situations”.

But then, I’m obviously completely unrealistic on these things. After all, I didn’t pass my driving test ’til I’d managed to avoid the really stupid ‘real-world’ mistakes, like stalling the car at junctions.